I googled Guardian Money but am unsure if you mean the Guardian Newspaper Guardian Money or some sort of solicitors or debt collection agency who are called Guardian Money (who I can't find?

Do you mean report this to the Guardian Newspapers Money Dept?

Again, apologies for being thick.

RegardsDavid

He probably means the "we'll make the phone calls for you" section of the Grauniad newspaper. There are similar columns in The Times (on Saturday, run by a girl whose default and indeed only setting is that the complainer, however obviously wrong, must be right) and The Sunday Times.

Insurers seem generally to back down when confronted by these people. Since your grievance appears wholly genuine, it might be worth a shot.

After lotís of stress with the insurance company and lots of other personal issues I decided to closed my claim for the theft of my equipment in January 2013 with the insurance company yesterday. I know thatís what they wanted as they did everything to delay be obstructive and even resorting to abuse to try to get me to give up.I looked at what my premiums would be if there was no claim then looked at my premiums with it listed. The cost of the premiums would be astronomical and only slightly less astronomical if I didnít claim. One quote I had yesterday was £1500. The insurance company promised me that my premiums would not be affected. Ha!They won, I caved.

I lost a lot of camera equipment which I will never be able to buy again for the next 5 years as I cannot insure it in or outside. If I want to take the risk of losing it then I may do but donít relish the thought of some toe rag stealing it again.According to the Police there are persons who go out stealing stuff from cars or wherever who then hand the goods to a handler who then fences the equipment, never to be seen again. The annoying thing is they know who commits these crimes but canít really do anything about it. Even if they catch them redhanded, the thief then agrees to accept many other offences to lessen the sentence and get let out quicker only to go back stealing stuff again. They may not have even done the other crimes but to the Police at least it looks good on the report sheet that theyíve cleared loads of crimes in one go.

Wonderful.

I have the option now of selling the rest of the Canon lenses and getting a digital point and shoot or forget that and just go film entirely. One things for certain, Iíll never have insurance with that horrible company ever again.

Yes name and shame please. I'm in the UK and have just renewed my camera insurance. Would hate to have handed over a lot of money for the premium to a company that don't pay out in the event of a loss.

towergate?Everyone I know uses Williamson and Carson who are photography/film specialists. My cover which includes employers and public liability is less than what I would be charged for E & P with another insurer who just add a nought on the end when you say you are a photographer.

The Brokers are Walmsleys in Wigan they are part of Swinton.The insurance company are Prestige Underwriters.The underwriters are Axa insurance.The loss adjusters Axa used are Gab Robins.A lady called Kay Hodgson was very rude and discourteous to me and tried to put words in my mouth. A ploy i feel she is used to using to get claiments to be horrible back in order to get the claim throw out because they are not dealing in the "Upmost Good Faith".

Keep an eye on Gumtree I have seen some high ticket photo gear popping up on there before. I would also contact different photo clubs/ organisations such as the SWPP, AOP, Royal Society etc and give them the serial numbers as they can post them on their message boards

The underwriters are Axa insurance.The loss adjusters Axa used are Gab Robins.A lady called Kay Hodgson was very rude and discourteous to me and tried to put words in my mouth. A ploy i feel she is used to using to get claiments to be horrible back in order to get the claim throw out because they are not dealing in the "Upmost Good Faith".

As I've said, I sympathise, but discussions on the telephone, however ill-tempered, have nothing to do with the legal concept of "utmost good faith" which is generally applied to insurance contracts.

I can't believe my eyes reading this thread! One heck of a story, how could this happen?

This is not the time to give up, please use all the advise given and do not back down. These people should be made to realize that they are all going to get a lot of bad publicity within the photography community! Something that they are going to care about and place a value on.

Makes me think twice about my own insurance renewals coming up this month.

with the help of this online group - sony corp decided it was in their best interest to 'settle' with me on my circumstance - terms are in confidence with Sony - needless to say no more Sony - have Runco now...

now - get busy - find a way to get your compensation - you paid for it...

I feel depleted at the moment, there are so many other problems and fights to pick not connected with this that I had to make a choice.This had to go, I havn't been sleeping nights since the theft and the insurance company just made things worse.

I start a new job on Monday so am going to be very busy for a while. I'll have to fit this all in when I can.

I would agree with you if Kay Hodgson had not said that she was going to speak to Axa to tell that I was being obstructive and get the claim cancelled.

It's always a bad idea to take bullying clerks at their face value. "Being obstructive" in her view presumably means not giving her information to which she believes she is entitled or not co-operating with her in some other petty way. It's unlikely that she has the authority to tell insurers to cancel a claim: it's their money, after all, not her's or her employer's. While like all low-grade employees she can no doubt be obnoxiously obstructive (think of airport "security" staff), nothing that she does is concerned with the pre-contractual legal concept of "uberrimae fidei".

Unfortunately this is the reality of insurance. Trying to get them to pay you is almost impossible.I had an issue with the Israeli post office and customs. A shipment had been inspected and openedusing a box cutter and the same knife was used to remove bubble wrap and a slash was made over the camera body cutting two rubber covered buttons. Instantly taking loads of value off the camera.

The US post office was very helpful and the postmaster inspected both the package, the paper trail and the photos of the itembefore shipping and after, including my photos of the package with visible damage before I even opened it.

The Israeli postal service insisted that I send them the camera and packaging for inspection.Every other national postal service I checked with accepts US post master reports.

Shipping it back was just a ploy to make it not worth while. The Israeli postal service insisted that I send the original box back in a bigger box.The whole turnaround would have taken months and the cost of shipping back to the Israeli postal service would be at my expense regardless of the outcome.

It's the same old trick. When insurance is involved they just make it really hard work to collect hoping that you will give up.

The Isreali gentleman that sold me the item was great and as helpful as can be. He was so embarrassed by the whole thingand knowing how dealing with the insurance would be he offered me a discount as it was preferable to dealing with the insurance for him too.He could have "hidden" behind the post offices request for sending the item back. I could also have returned the item to the senderfor a refund but chose not to put this all on the shoulders of the seller.We split the loss.... well only after I found a buyer that wanted the camera despite the damage but for a big discount.

It's a sad situation all round. We buy insurance in good faith and then get pushed around.There's another problem too. If you go to lawyers to resolve the problem you can get blacklisted and it can be difficult to get coverage in the future.

I don't bother with theft insurance. 3rd party liability is essential, but for theft I prefer security and using less expensive gear that I can "self insure". It's great that today top of the line "consumer" gear covers 90% of what pro photography needs.... or more.Hell the cost of a 24MP plus 35mm camera is probably about the same as the insurance premium for an MF system.

Being on the nimble side has it's advantages.

A friend told me about the time he was on location and they were robbed. He never got the money back because the insurance claimed he gave in to easily. They even had the gall to ask why no one took any photos of the assailants as not all the cameras were stolen

While discussing the issue on facebook can be very effective one has to be very careful.Specific accusations need to be very well documented. Just leaving out name etc is not the way to go and can be used against you.Many companies sue over social media comments, especially companies that behave like many insurance companies do.They have very deep pockets and it's a good investment in their eyes to attack an unhappy customer as it will scare others off.Extreme caution needs to be taken with insurance companies due to the complexity and sheer size of their contracts.There is a lot of mumbojumbo in them regarding how to deal with a dispute. Most of that is designed to protect you not them.

Be sure to keep copies of everything you post on the issue. Some of what the OP has said on this thread could already be problematic.

I had an issue with a high end car company. I did use Facebook after all else failed. The result was what I needed done and it was done quickly.Prior to that I had made endless calls and visits to dealerships and their overpriced diagnosis bullshit.I also made sure that they knew I was very well documented on the issue. This IMO was what made it effective.

Consumers have been sued despite being right in substance. the companies involved often go to great ends to make sure it gets to the newsbecause it's really intimidation they are after.

While discussing the issue on facebook can be very effective one has to be very careful.Specific accusations need to be very well documented. Just leaving out name etc is not the way to go and can be used against you.Many companies sue over social media comments, especially companies that behave like many insurance companies do.They have very deep pockets and it's a good investment in their eyes to attack an unhappy customer as it will scare others off.Extreme caution needs to be taken with insurance companies due to the complexity and sheer size of their contracts.There is a lot of mumbojumbo in them regarding how to deal with a dispute. Most of that is designed to protect you not them.

Be sure to keep copies of everything you post on the issue. Some of what the OP has said on this thread could already be problematic.

I had an issue with a high end car company. I did use Facebook after all else failed. The result was what I needed done and it was done quickly.Prior to that I had made endless calls and visits to dealerships and their overpriced diagnosis bullshit.I also made sure that they knew I was very well documented on the issue. This IMO was what made it effective.

Consumers have been sued despite being right in substance. the companies involved often go to great ends to make sure it gets to the newsbecause it's really intimidation they are after.

point well taken

i was able to settle with sony - for the sole reason i fully documented every conversation i had - the dade time and who i spoke to - took notes as to the tenpr of the phonecall and what results were obtained at every step... CYA... cover yor rear attributes...